A New Manhattan Project for Clean Energy

A New Manhattan Project for Clean Energy

Over the past year many luminaries have made clarion calls for a concerted effort to solve the energy crisis. It is a crisis, with 300 million middle class Chinese determined to attain the unsustainable lifestyle we have sold them. Their thirst for oil is growing at 30% a year, and can do nothing but heat the earth and spark political conflict.

We have been heating the earth since the agricultural revolution with the positive result of providing 10,000 years of warm stability. But since the Industrial revolution we have been pushing the biosphere over the brink. Life forces have done this before -- during the snowball earth period ( Cryogenian Period ) in the Neoproterozoic toward the end of the Precambrian - but that life force was not sentient!

Thomas Freedman of the New York Times has called for a Manhattan Project for clean energy The New York Times> Search> Abstract . Richard Smalley, one of the fathers of nanotechnology, has made a similar plea http://news.uns.purdue.edu/html3mont...ey.energy.html .
We are at the cusp in several technologies to fulfilling this clean energy dream. All that we need is the political leadership to shift our fiscal priorities.

I feel our resources should be focused in three promising technologies:

1. Nanotechnology: The exploitation of quantum effects is finally being seen in these new materials. Photovoltaics (PV) are at last going beyond silicon, with many companies promising near-term breakthroughs in efficiencies and lower cost. Even silicon is gaining new efficienies from nano-tech: Researchers develop technique to use dirty silicon, could pave way for cheaper solar energy http://www.physorg.com/news5831.html

Titania Nanotube Arrays Harness Solar Energy
http://www.physorg.com/news10244.html

Direct Solar to Hydrogen:
Rupert Leach, Director, Newspath Ltd, from the UK posted me about his talking to the Chairman of Hydrogen Solar, Julian Keable http://www.hydrogensolar.com/index.html, saying that they will be well over 10% efficiency in the near future with their Tandem Cell™, technology, and that they had initial issues with scale-up, but these seem to have been overcome and they were sounding rather optimistic a few weeks ago.



Thermionics: The direct conversion of heat to electricity has been at best only 5% efficient. Now with quantum tunneling chips we are talking 80% of carnot efficiency. A good example is the proposed thermionic car design of Borealis. ( http://www.borealis.gi/press/NEW-GOL...peech.6=04.pdf ) . The estimated well-to-wheel efficiency is over 50%. This compares to 13% for internal combustion and 27% for hydrogen fuel cells. This means a car that has a range of 1500 miles on one fill up. Rodney T. Cox, president of Borealis, has told me that he plans to have this car developed within two years. Boeing has already used his Chorus motor drives http://www.chorusmotors.gi/.
on the nose gear of it's 767. (Boeing Demonstrates New Technology for Moving Airplanes on the Ground http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/...r_050801a.html )
The Borealis thermocouple power chips http://www.powerchips.gi/index.shtml (and cool chips) applied to all the waste heat in our economy would make our unsustainable lifestyle more than sustainable.
You may find an extensive discussion on thermo electric patents at: Nanalyze Forums - Direct conversion of heat to electricity http://www.nanalyze.com/forums/topic..._ID=1006&#2686

2. Biotechnology: Since his revolutionary work on the human genome project, Craig Venter has been finding thousands of previously unknown life forms in the sea and air. His goal is to use these creatures to develop the ultimate energy bug to produce hydrogen and or use of their photoreceptor genes for solar energy. http://www.venterscience.org/ Imagine a bioreactor in your home taking all your waste, adding some solar energy, and your electric and transportation needs are fulfilled.

BIO Hydrogen: http://www.nanologix.net/index.php
"NanoLogix is a nanobiotechnology company that engages in the research, development, and commercialization of technologies for the production of bacteria, disease testing kits, alternative sources of fuel"
The NanoLogix breakthrough came about when the Company’s researchers were tinkering with its proprietary biological-based diagnostic and remediation technologies, noting that one of its patented bacterial culturing methods could produce byproduct gas surprisingly rich in hydrogen.


3. Fusion: Here I am not talking about the big science ITER project taking thirty years, but the several small alternative plasma fusion efforts.

There are three companies pursuing hydrogen-boron plasma toroid fusion, Paul Koloc, Prometheus II, Eric Lerner, Focus Fusion and Clint Seward of Electron Power Systems http://www.electronpowersystems.com/ . A resent DOD review of EPS technology reads as fallows:

"MIT considers these plasmas a revolutionary breakthrough, with Delphi's
chief scientist and senior manager for advanced technology both agreeing
that EST/SPT physics are repeatable and theoretically explainable. MIT and
EPS have jointly authored numerous professional papers describing their
work. (Delphi is a $33B company, the spun off Delco Division of General
Motors)."

and

"Cost: no cost data available. The complexity of reliable mini-toroid
formation and acceleration with compact, relatively low-cost equipment
remains to be determined. Yet the fact that the EPS/MIT STTR work this
technology has attracted interest from Delphi is very significant, as the
automotive electronics industry is considered to be extremely demanding of
functionality per dollar and pound (e.g., mil-spec performance at
Wal-Mart-class 'commodity' prices)."

EPS, Electron Power Systems seems the strongest and most advanced, and I love the scalability, They propose applications as varied as home power generation@ .ooo5 cents/KWhr, cars, distributed power, airplanes, space propulsion , power storage and kinetic weapons.

It also provides a theoretic base for ball lighting : Ball Lightning Explained as a Stable Plasma Toroid http://www.electronpowersystems.com/...0Explained.pdf
The theoretics are all there in peer reviewed papers. It does sound to good to be true however with names like MIT, Delphi, STTR grants, NIST grants , etc., popping up all over, I have to keep investigating.

Recent support has also come from one of the top lightning researcher in the world, Joe Dwyer at FIT, when he got his Y-ray and X-ray research published in the May issue of Scientific American,
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?cha...9683414B7FFE9F
Dwyer's paper:
http://www.lightning.ece.ufl.edu/PDF/Gammarays.pdf

and according to Clint Seward it supports his lightning models and fusion work at Electron Power Systems

Clint sent Joe and I his new paper on a lightning charge transport model of cloud to ground lightning (he did not want me to post it to the web yet). Joe was supportive and suggested some other papers to consider and Clint is now in re-write.

It may also explain Elves, blue jets, sprites and red sprites, plasmas that appear above thunder storms. After a little searching, this seemed to have the best hard numbers on the observations of sprites.

Dr. Mark A. Stanley's Dissertation
http://nis-www.lanl.gov/~stanleym/di...tion/main.html

And may also explain the spiral twist of some fulgurites, hollow fused sand tubes found in sandy ground at lightning strikes.


The learning curve is so steep now, and with the resources of the online community, I'm sure we can rally greater support to solve this paramount problem of our time. I hold no truck with those who argue that big business or government are suppressing these technologies. It is only our complacency and comfort that blind us from pushing our leaders toward clean energy.


Erich J. Knight
shengar@aol.com

I scanned your post, but it was your closing sensible and accurate statement that encourages me to go back and read it (and the associated links) properly.
Let me ask you why you are less interested in large scale fusion projects. Surely the time scale on these is decades because, as with all the other examples you have mentioned, there is insufficient investment. No?

Big science has spent tens of billions and we are no closer to a break even reactor. Just a few hundred thousand toward these alternative concepts may get us there. The ITER will take 5 billion and they say it will be decades befor it puts any power on the grid.

I do like the LDX : http://psfcwww2.psfc.mit.edu/ldx/

What do you all think of this direct solar to hydrogen technology? I was told they have hit 10% efficiency and solved mass production problems. Hydrogen Solar home http://www.hydrogensolar.com/index.html

And This company:
Barnabus Energy, Inc. (OTC BB : BBSE) Investor Facts http://www.otcfn.com/bbse/report.html
I can't find much on the Suncone, but the solar roofing technology they are acquiring looks solid.

And just coming out of the lab, this looks very strong:
UB News Services-solar nano-dots
http://www.buffalo.edu/news/fast-exe...ticle=75000009

Cheers,
Erich J. Knight

1) What does not exist cannot be discovered.
2) There are no maxima or minima to be discovered on a plane.
3) There are no exceptions to the laws of thermodynamics.
4) Physical reality is not subject to majority or minority vote, or any vote at all.
5) Prayer, see (4)
6) Enviro-whinerism: Expensive, shoddy, deadly.
7) Civilization knows what it is doing.
8) Don't be an idiot - or at least don't be a gullible idiot.

Sustainable development: Luddism.
Poverty: the process by which opportunity requires personal responsibility.
Natural: odorous, ignorant, dangerous, ineffective; always recommended to somebody else.
Environmentalism: whatever you have of value, we are against it.
Globalization: universal opportunity creates pandemic poverty because only workers have money to spend.
Liberal: one who believes HIV and AIDS are spread by a lack of funding.
Economic policy: best guesses in general; payoffs in particular.
Compassion: an evolutionarily stupid act committed at others' expense.
Conservation: somebody else in the tenebrous future deserves to consume it; and not them, either.
Social engineering: assassination of the future.

Hi I'm new to this site and there seems to be a good few discussions

I had to register to reply to UncleAl's post, because I think he may be misinformed on a few subjects.

Firstly nanotechnology is something that is being and has being acheived, it will take more time and resources to get to the level where it can be true nanotech, so it isn't something that doesnt exist, and it is something that can be achieved.

Secondly, sustainable development is in no way Luddism, it is a practical approach to managing limited resources for long term use. Perfect example of unsustainable living can be seen on Easter Island where the inhabitants used every resource and ended up as a small collection of cannibals before being discovered.

Poverty: I find that a rather naive commenti. Take the 5million or so children dying in Africa on a yearly basis. Each starving family cannot make good their existence, no matter what responsibility you may think they have. Their responsibilioty is to feed themselves, yet they are not allowed to.

Environmentalism: clearly you either do not understand what it is, or how it works
Conservation: is the protection of a system, building, habitat, ecology, almost anything so that it is not lost to the world, either for aesthetic, scientific, historic, religious or any other many reasons.

Can "clean" energy be produced, absolutely, the return on even todays inefficient systems such as wind, wave, photovoltaic energy are greater than the energy needed to make them. There is a slow convergeance of technologies which will have dramatic effects in the future. It is because of the lack of political will or ignorance that it will take longer than may be necessary. Large companies are unwilling to spend money because they are largely concerned with their return to be within months rather than years so it is left to the fringe to solve the issues.

Whether or not something llike a manhattan project will happen, it is clear that there is a need for some form of efficient, economical, and sustainable energy.

An example of a sustainable resource that has been used for thousands of years and can be managed for thousands to come; wood

I am anxious to see where this statement will take us. In any event, welcome to Hypography Tagred, I hope you enjoy all the debate and discussion. BTW I would give you high marks for that first post...............................enjoy

Ummmmmm. I'm going to await reading the replies with interest.

I'm with damocles... my theory is a comment like this is what inspired UncleAl's avatar.

"I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today." The US burned the equivalent of 47 million bbl of oil today, yesterday, and tomorrow. Promises of a fairy dust future Eden don't cut it when somebody flips a lightswitch. Why don't yout ell us how much 47 million bbl of oil weigh?

The spotted owl is an endangered species. No gene-geneered Franken-forests. No active pest management- toxic! No clear cutting! No cutting forests that suck up carbon dioxide. Wood is off-limits. No wood.

MIRACLE! Grantology. A nano-whatever is all surface area and no volume. Tell us how to run a machine whose power output is less than the surface tension of water. Dirt and wet seize them solid.

Do you have any idea how much energy the US uses/year? It has held reasonably steady at 60 bbl oil equiv/capita. 1 boe = 1700 kWhr-thermal. There are 290 million US folk or

1.74x10^10 boe/year, or
2.96x10^13 kWhr-thermal/year, or
1.065x10^20 joules/year, or...

...or the equivalent of 1.2 metric tonnes of matter 100% converted into energy each year, E=mc^2. Are ya gonna alternatively burn algae, git, or catch wind?

THEY LIED TO YOU. "Shut up and calculate," Richard Feynman.

http://fti.neep.wisc.edu/neep602/lecture4.html